It seems rather illogical that the murder of JonBenet was this guy's first venture into criminality.

Sneaking into an occupied house. Bringing in certain items. Amongst which is a ransom note full of false leads. Then transcribing the note onto stationary found in the house.

Then killing a little girl in some ritualistic manner.

All this while leaving virtually no clues behind.

Then he disappears into the night and as far as we know is never heard from again.

It seems as if there should be a string of crimes perhaps less intense leading up to this one. And unless he was caught for something else, more crimes of a similar nature that followed it.

But no, there is none of that as far as we know.

Is this a perp that only appears around Christmas time? Could this guy have ties to the Boulder area, but also ties to the U.K.? I got this U.K. connection from a post on this forum showing the dollar sign that looks as if it was an overwrite of a British pound sign.

If this guy spends most of time away from the U.S., that might explain why there isn't a DNA hit. I'd might give foreign DNA databases a test looking for a match.

I also don't think this is our guy's first attempt to break the law - but I do think he may have been into small stuff before - - breaking in, stealing panties and photos to use when he wanted a fantasy.

I think the overall plan here failed - the killer screwed up and this crime wasNOT what he dreamed of. I honestly think he would tell you it was a disaster.

>It's the darn note that makes this so different. >If my neighbor is correct about at least part of it being >transcribed, then it indicates a plan to not only do the >deed but also trick the authorities.

Yes. There are certain elements that have a significant impact:a ransom note makes one think of a kidnapping, but the corpse left there ends all thought of a ransom payment.

A molested and murdered little girl makes one think of a sex crime, but a kidnapping note ends that speculation.

This was not a 'ritualistic' crime. It merely has some trappings of some pretty 'wimpy' bondage and somewhat 'wimpy' molestation and very 'wimpy' torture with a stun gun. But it is all 'trappings'. There is no substance to it.

The time and effort devoted to the note far exceeds what would be sensible if it were just a sex crime. The manner of the murder is far in excess of what would be simply "getting rid of a percipient witness to the molestation".

This was a 'crowning achievement', don't look for dozens of other similar crimes by the same perpetrator: there won't be any.

to violence. Taking the evidence on face value, it was a kidnapping gone bad by an amatuer.....and it's obvious "Ransom" was an inspiration....so there could have been planning in entering the house and leaving a note, which could have been pre-written or even tape recorded and transcribed. In fact, it makes sense there was a tape recorder in the tool kit--they could have taped JBR's voice, to be played back into the phone later. I doubt much planning was done in how they would get the money. If the kidnapping had been successful, and the note followed----no police would have been called, and the thought at the time could have been they'd get the money fast and be gone.

They might have been more concerned about their voices being taped, then leaving what they thought was a disguised note that couldn't be traced.

JB was murdered how thousands of women, girls, and boys have been. Only difference is, her body was left in the home. This killer is no different from the sexual predator who abducts strangers from the street and leaves their bodies in remote areas.

The only difference I can see is this person left her body and a rn behind. Why? Is the question. He knew intimate details of the family. That would make him a stalking predator and JB was his prey.

I think it went exactly as he planned and he would not say it was a disaster but a HUGE success. He has gone undetected for 7 years.

A molested and murdered little girl makes one think of a sex crime, but a kidnapping note ends that speculation.

How so, Don? The murder still occurred. The molestation still occurred. How does the "kidnapping note end that speculation"? I understand "kidnapping" fails with no live victim to negotiate with, but I think the kidnapping is the "speculation" that ended with the discovery of the "molested and murdered little girl".

This was not a 'ritualistic' crime. It merely has some trappings of some pretty 'wimpy' bondage and somewhat 'wimpy' molestation and very 'wimpy' torture with a stun gun. But it is all 'trappings'. There is no substance to it.

I am not so sure. I believe the APPEARANCE of JonBenét with black duct tape over her mouth, wrists bound (granted, not tightly), arms straight up over her head, with a deeply embedded ligature still tied to a "handle" around her neck, a note giving him voice, evidence of stun gun attacks, and a sexual assault were a little more than "trappings". I suspect even the exact, even measurement for the neck ligature and the wrist ligature (each were equal in length) is an indication of an "exacting" person, who may have required the APPEARANCE and EXECUTION of this crime to be just as it was.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~Re: Garrote

Does anyone think there was a REASON for the 17 inch length of excess cord that ran from the 'noose' to the paintbrush handle? Would that be the length of JB's arms?

>How so, Don? The murder still occurred. The molestation >still occurred. How does the "kidnapping note end that speculation"? Oh its still murder and molestation, but when you have an overly lengthy, meandering 'ransom note' suddenly you know that you are dealing with someone who had other motives. Way too much time and effort invested in the note. Perverts, even loquacious ones, wouldn't be doing that if what they really wanted was perverted sex and murder.

>"...a little more than "trappings"..."Four stun gun marks are trappings, twenty would have been 'fun'.Oh sure, we can draw the line somewhere else and nitpick about it, but the point is that I think the word 'wimpy' is more applicable when you consider other crimes involving dead little girls.

I >is an indication of an "exacting" personOfcourse. Precision in the spacing of the note, precision in the wrapping of the garotte,

>Does anyone think there was a REASON for the 17 inch>length of excess cord that ran from the 'noose' to the >paintbrush handle? Would that be the length of JB's arms? More likely its the length of his arms as he stands with his foot on her body as he pulls the paintbrush.

Such things as foreign dna databases might well be a valid point of inquiry, but I was wondering about a more "immediate" before and after.

One crime scene analyst was confronted with a very bloody crime scene but no apparent use by the killer of the bathroom to clean his hands or his clothing. She therefore believed the killer might simply have walked home, thus making him a nearby resident.

So I wonder about a 'before' and 'after' from the viewpoint of a very short time span:

Before: Various options here. He could have been living in the area or he could have driven to it and observed the house for awhile. He had to approach the house on foot at some point in time. If he drove, would a van be less noticeable.

After: This is the important one. Lou Smit pointed out when he first spoke to DA-Hunter, even before being hired on the case, that the killer had to have written the note prior to the murder because he would have been too agitated to sit down much less write it afterwards. So how does a person who is so excited get a way from the crime scene? He sure doesn't want to call a taxi. Is he "too hyper" to drive somewhere? Did he get a traffic ticket that night as he drove away from the house? Was he so primed with energy that he drove immediately to the 'red light' area where there might have been surveillance cameras? Or to a bar or liquor store?

Inside knowledge? Sounds mysterious, but just what would he have had to 'know' in advance? The address? The name Ramsey. Something in the note seems to relate to a business but nothing in the note indicates any particular familiarity with what that business is.

The use of southern and business indicated to me someone with a limited, superficial knowledge of John.

Until proven wrong, I will always believe the note author was the mastermind. The actual killer was someone influenced by money or possibly blackmail.

It's sad to say, but there just may not be enough evidence to find or convict anyone of this crime. Perhaps a death bed confession of someone blabbing to a cellmate will be the only way this crime is solved.

It deosn't seem logical that someone could pull off something this bold without a clear track record of similar crimes before and after. This would be especially true if his motive was sexual.

This guy Kenady interests me. My theory is that there is a relationship between the 1974 McReynold's kidnapping and JonBenet. Kenady qualifies age wise and geographically. He inserted himself into the JonBenet case which is sometimes common behavior for perps. What's his relationship to Helgoth? They are 20 years apart. He felt compelled to break and entire to assist in the case. Does he have a criminal record prior to that? Is there any possible link between this guy and the McReynold's family?